High Street Sales Slumpm Government...
News1 min ago
Listener 3952
41 Answers
Having polished off all those anagrams in double-quick time, why not take a look at this week's Listener, Abundance by Seth Mould
C
C
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by cruciverbali. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I did not specifically refer to Joe in that way at all, Eddery; I simply decried "sanctimonious Listenerites" (plural) in general.
I am certainly not aggressive, simply piddled off with the constant - and invariably utterly unsupported - claims that the Listener deserves special treatment which those Listenerites are utterly unprepared to offer similar prize competitions.
You may feel I am "out of line"...clearly, I don't. Demanding special reverence for one particular crossword is "out of line" in my view. Seems just like the proud parent of a Scottish soldier parading with his regiment along Princes Street in Edinburgh...the mother cried excitedly to her husband, "Ooh, look! They're a' oot o' step but oor Jock!"
I posted answers as assistance to the questioner, Ash, in order that he/she might - by a bit of DIY - further grasp what I had said about the instructions.
You think Bunstance's coaching methods are more effective. Perhaps they would be, but I still haven't seen the separate posting I suggested above he should make to 'advertise' his e-mail services. Have you?
Four answers may well be a Simpsons 'handful', but I did make it abundantly clear that I was in no way guaranteeing they were correct. I imagined the questioner would apply my suggested approach to these in order to test whether they were.
Why is it that Listenerites should feel free to reveal all about the Azed, say, when they feel Azedders must not be similarly enabled re the Listener? I might see that what I have done - and will most assuredly go on doing - as 'crossing' people if they would just provide a rational answer to this paragraph's opening sentence and the other questions I have asked here and elsewhere. They never do and nor have you.
(cont...
I am certainly not aggressive, simply piddled off with the constant - and invariably utterly unsupported - claims that the Listener deserves special treatment which those Listenerites are utterly unprepared to offer similar prize competitions.
You may feel I am "out of line"...clearly, I don't. Demanding special reverence for one particular crossword is "out of line" in my view. Seems just like the proud parent of a Scottish soldier parading with his regiment along Princes Street in Edinburgh...the mother cried excitedly to her husband, "Ooh, look! They're a' oot o' step but oor Jock!"
I posted answers as assistance to the questioner, Ash, in order that he/she might - by a bit of DIY - further grasp what I had said about the instructions.
You think Bunstance's coaching methods are more effective. Perhaps they would be, but I still haven't seen the separate posting I suggested above he should make to 'advertise' his e-mail services. Have you?
Four answers may well be a Simpsons 'handful', but I did make it abundantly clear that I was in no way guaranteeing they were correct. I imagined the questioner would apply my suggested approach to these in order to test whether they were.
Why is it that Listenerites should feel free to reveal all about the Azed, say, when they feel Azedders must not be similarly enabled re the Listener? I might see that what I have done - and will most assuredly go on doing - as 'crossing' people if they would just provide a rational answer to this paragraph's opening sentence and the other questions I have asked here and elsewhere. They never do and nor have you.
(cont...
The usual "explanation" is the sacred statistics. The major elements of these seem to be a) How many of the year's 52 crosswords did you - as an individual - get correct? b) How long is it since you - as an individual - last submitted a grid with an error?
If I provided a complete answer to one competition - and this week's would be a perfectly ideal opportunity to do so! - and 200 AnswerBankers submitted correct entries as a result, what effect would that have on the two statistical figures above? None! And what are the chances that any AnswerBanker would bother? Slim in the extreme.
In other words, my occasional offering of individual answers is of no significance whatsoever either to Listener organisers or to entrants. I hope, however, the questioners feel they have benefited. That's what AnswerBank is for.
Let me remind you that <i<you have "no need to denigrate my view" either. I've explained till I'm tired of it why I hold mine, but no Listenerite - including yourself - has ever taken the trouble to explain how exactly these answers have made any difference to them.
If you are not going to answer the string of questions I have posed here and in the "other threads" in which you have clearly seen these, there's little point in your bothering to respond to this at all. Bear in mind, "Because it makes some people angry" is not an acceptable answer for me!
If I provided a complete answer to one competition - and this week's would be a perfectly ideal opportunity to do so! - and 200 AnswerBankers submitted correct entries as a result, what effect would that have on the two statistical figures above? None! And what are the chances that any AnswerBanker would bother? Slim in the extreme.
In other words, my occasional offering of individual answers is of no significance whatsoever either to Listener organisers or to entrants. I hope, however, the questioners feel they have benefited. That's what AnswerBank is for.
Let me remind you that <i<you have "no need to denigrate my view" either. I've explained till I'm tired of it why I hold mine, but no Listenerite - including yourself - has ever taken the trouble to explain how exactly these answers have made any difference to them.
If you are not going to answer the string of questions I have posed here and in the "other threads" in which you have clearly seen these, there's little point in your bothering to respond to this at all. Bear in mind, "Because it makes some people angry" is not an acceptable answer for me!
Don't want to get bogged down in the mire, so will just say do what you want to do. However using your earlier athlete analogy, do you believe that because some world class performers achieve through drug abuse, then it's ok for everyone else to? Just because other crosswords attract an abundance of posted full answers, it does not necessarily mean that you should feel you have carte blanche on the Listener.
QuizMonster, I think the reason that you aren�t getting answers to your questions is that no-one contributing to this thread actually holds the opinions on which your attack is centred, and on which the questions are premised.
As far as I can tell, none of us here believes that any of the competitions currently face a significant threat as a result of spoilers here, nor that the Listener crossword is in principle different from the others, nor that it is impossible in principle for a �common-room of Oxford dons� to collaborate on submitting solutions, nor that it would be a disaster if they did. I also don�t recall anyone asking you either to change or to justify your behaviour, so your insistent refusal to change your ways seems a trifle unnecessary.
I am getting a very strong sense of someone spoiling for a fight with a third party who isn�t actually present.
As far as I can tell, none of us here believes that any of the competitions currently face a significant threat as a result of spoilers here, nor that the Listener crossword is in principle different from the others, nor that it is impossible in principle for a �common-room of Oxford dons� to collaborate on submitting solutions, nor that it would be a disaster if they did. I also don�t recall anyone asking you either to change or to justify your behaviour, so your insistent refusal to change your ways seems a trifle unnecessary.
I am getting a very strong sense of someone spoiling for a fight with a third party who isn�t actually present.
A very interesting discussion.
I think Quizmonster misses the point that if answers are given away here, especially in the midst of a general discussion, it will put people off contributing to discussions like this. For example, I was very interested to read the contributions on this thread, but had to be very careful that I didn't inadvertently see something I didn't want to.
Collaboration on Listener solving is to be commended, but collaboration in public runs the risk of spoiling things for those who would like to have their say but don't want to see the answers too soon. And the simplest, most innocent thread by title can soon degenerate, so the argument that one should just "look away now" while strictly speaking correct, doesn't tell the whole story.
I strongly recommend that folk who are interested in becoming more proficient in Listener solving contribute to the discussions on the Crossword Centre site mentioned above and also the look at explanations to puzzles at www.listenercrossword.com, where you'll also find the "beginners guide "articles reprinted.
I think Quizmonster misses the point that if answers are given away here, especially in the midst of a general discussion, it will put people off contributing to discussions like this. For example, I was very interested to read the contributions on this thread, but had to be very careful that I didn't inadvertently see something I didn't want to.
Collaboration on Listener solving is to be commended, but collaboration in public runs the risk of spoiling things for those who would like to have their say but don't want to see the answers too soon. And the simplest, most innocent thread by title can soon degenerate, so the argument that one should just "look away now" while strictly speaking correct, doesn't tell the whole story.
I strongly recommend that folk who are interested in becoming more proficient in Listener solving contribute to the discussions on the Crossword Centre site mentioned above and also the look at explanations to puzzles at www.listenercrossword.com, where you'll also find the "beginners guide "articles reprinted.
Phrases such as 'out of line', 'feel you have carte blanche' and 'change your ways' just reinforce my resentment in that they make it clear that - despite disclaimers - people still believe the Listener to be somehow sacrosanct. Why don't you toe my line or change your ways? Why is your 'carte' seemingly 'blancher' than mine?
I'm far from being the only member here who is perfectly happy to offer Listener answers, so these are not just my lines, ways and cartes. And there are other AnswerBankers, albeit not necessarily on this thread, who certainly do hold all of the beliefs outlined in your middle paragraph, Bunstance.
I'm not spoiling for a fight with anyone, but I am certainly intent on holding to my view that there is nothing whatever special about the Listener in any way which matters.
Accordingly, whenever I see a Listener query that I can answer, I will. (If a hint, nudge or suggestion is requested, that's all I'll offer.) If anyone then appears on that thread to suggest that I ought not to have done either, my only response will not be the reasoned points I have always tried to make up until now. I shall simply write 'Shoemakers!' (That's in case its near-synonym is forbidden here.)
I'm far from being the only member here who is perfectly happy to offer Listener answers, so these are not just my lines, ways and cartes. And there are other AnswerBankers, albeit not necessarily on this thread, who certainly do hold all of the beliefs outlined in your middle paragraph, Bunstance.
I'm not spoiling for a fight with anyone, but I am certainly intent on holding to my view that there is nothing whatever special about the Listener in any way which matters.
Accordingly, whenever I see a Listener query that I can answer, I will. (If a hint, nudge or suggestion is requested, that's all I'll offer.) If anyone then appears on that thread to suggest that I ought not to have done either, my only response will not be the reasoned points I have always tried to make up until now. I shall simply write 'Shoemakers!' (That's in case its near-synonym is forbidden here.)
Quizmonster - I now quote you - "Accordingly, whenever I see a Listener query that I can answer, I will. (If a hint, nudge or suggestion is requested, that's all I'll offer.)"
At the beginning of this thread, Ash24 did not ask for four answers to Listener questions. He just asked where he should start.
Your interpretation of that query was that you might dump a few random answers in the public domain. It has merely been put to you since, that a more measured and considered approach might have been that proposed by Bunstance - i.e. some coaching in how this particular poster might start.
You seem happy to contradict your above-quoted principles by posting answers unprompted. At the same time you seem happy to trek out the same old rant - 'Listenerites', 'special reverence', 'sacrosanct', 'sacred statistics' etc....
Why oh why do you object so strongly and persist in such a nasty attack on something which clearly some people do indeed hold dear to them?
Your iconoclastic attitude is not one to be commended - sure you want to be seen to be helpful, and full marks to you for that. However, please please try to be sensitive to others' feelings in offering that help.
There are subtle ways in which assistance can be offered - you will gain more credit in many more peoples' eyes if you can offer your clearly invaluable help in less controversial and confrontataional style.
At the beginning of this thread, Ash24 did not ask for four answers to Listener questions. He just asked where he should start.
Your interpretation of that query was that you might dump a few random answers in the public domain. It has merely been put to you since, that a more measured and considered approach might have been that proposed by Bunstance - i.e. some coaching in how this particular poster might start.
You seem happy to contradict your above-quoted principles by posting answers unprompted. At the same time you seem happy to trek out the same old rant - 'Listenerites', 'special reverence', 'sacrosanct', 'sacred statistics' etc....
Why oh why do you object so strongly and persist in such a nasty attack on something which clearly some people do indeed hold dear to them?
Your iconoclastic attitude is not one to be commended - sure you want to be seen to be helpful, and full marks to you for that. However, please please try to be sensitive to others' feelings in offering that help.
There are subtle ways in which assistance can be offered - you will gain more credit in many more peoples' eyes if you can offer your clearly invaluable help in less controversial and confrontataional style.
Precisely...MY interpretation! You simply reinforce my point; namely, that I DON'T accept your interpretation. I find it hard to imagine how I can make this more crystal clear.
And yet again we have the notion that my opinions are a 'rant' whereas you are presumably conviced that your opinions are sweet reasonableness and light. Why do you fail to see that my view is no different from yours...ie "I'm right"?
"A nasty attack"..."iconoclastic attitude"...What arrant nonsense! I've explained in detail and ad nauseam why offering the occasional answer is no such thing and has no impact whatsoever on the crossword or its solvers.
I'd say I have ample "credit" in a lot of people's eyes on AnswerBank in general, created over many years...I care not a jot whether sanctimonious Listenerites here share that view.
And there I really am going to leave it...life truly is too short. If you reappear with your complaints, I really will respond with just "Shoemakers!" And you may count on my reappearance in any Listener thread I can answer.
End of story.
And yet again we have the notion that my opinions are a 'rant' whereas you are presumably conviced that your opinions are sweet reasonableness and light. Why do you fail to see that my view is no different from yours...ie "I'm right"?
"A nasty attack"..."iconoclastic attitude"...What arrant nonsense! I've explained in detail and ad nauseam why offering the occasional answer is no such thing and has no impact whatsoever on the crossword or its solvers.
I'd say I have ample "credit" in a lot of people's eyes on AnswerBank in general, created over many years...I care not a jot whether sanctimonious Listenerites here share that view.
And there I really am going to leave it...life truly is too short. If you reappear with your complaints, I really will respond with just "Shoemakers!" And you may count on my reappearance in any Listener thread I can answer.
End of story.
Hello C ... very much enjoyed Abundance - some neat twists and well constructed. I started off expecting the Bond hand to apear ( as used in Thunderball / Moonraker, forget which). Pleased it was not quite such a give-away & enjoyed working out the full deal. Another of the better ones for the year, though King remains the favourite.
Think a couple of us struck a nerve with Quizmonster and I seem to have become one of the 'sanctimonious Listenerites' despite being strongly in favour of the occasional hint even if anti full answer posting. Suspect this one will run and run as the two extremes of view seem not to recognise that there may be some common ground available to all camps. Or, to put it another way, it seems I can simply write Schumachers
?
Think a couple of us struck a nerve with Quizmonster and I seem to have become one of the 'sanctimonious Listenerites' despite being strongly in favour of the occasional hint even if anti full answer posting. Suspect this one will run and run as the two extremes of view seem not to recognise that there may be some common ground available to all camps. Or, to put it another way, it seems I can simply write Schumachers
?
Hi eddery !
Didn't think of Bond at all whilst solving this one (far too many years since I read the books !), but this is the Bridge hand you refer to:
Duke of Cumberland Hand - A purportedly rigged hand dealt the son of George III, the King of England, resulting in the loss of a �20,000 wager. The hand was was used in Chapter 7 (The Quickness of the Hand) of the James Bond novel, "Moonraker" against the villain Drax.
North - James Bond
Spades - Void
Heart - Void
Diamonds - Queen, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2
Clubs - Ace, Queen, 10, 8, 4
West -DRAX
Spades - Ace, king, queen, Jack
Hearts - Ace, king, queen, Jack
Diamonds - Ace, king
Clubs - King, Jack, 9
South- "M"
Spades - 10, 9, 8, 7
Hearts - 6, 5, 4, 3
Clubs - 7, 6, 5, 3, 2
East- Meyer
Spades - 6, 5, 4, 3, 2
Hearts - 10, 9, 8, 7, 2
Diamonds - Jack, 10, 9
Bond (N) 7C! XX
Meyer( E) (P)
M (S) P
Drax (W) (X)
While 007 only has 8 points in his hand, by finessing Drax's Club tenances and promoting Bond's long Diamond suit, he establishes a whopping 13 tricks!
I must admit that I assumed this puzzle featured a game of Solo Whist, with South bidding 'Misere Ouverte' and West 'Solo' (though West might claim 'abundance') Not playing either game, I relied heavily on research to work this one through.
C
Didn't think of Bond at all whilst solving this one (far too many years since I read the books !), but this is the Bridge hand you refer to:
Duke of Cumberland Hand - A purportedly rigged hand dealt the son of George III, the King of England, resulting in the loss of a �20,000 wager. The hand was was used in Chapter 7 (The Quickness of the Hand) of the James Bond novel, "Moonraker" against the villain Drax.
North - James Bond
Spades - Void
Heart - Void
Diamonds - Queen, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2
Clubs - Ace, Queen, 10, 8, 4
West -DRAX
Spades - Ace, king, queen, Jack
Hearts - Ace, king, queen, Jack
Diamonds - Ace, king
Clubs - King, Jack, 9
South- "M"
Spades - 10, 9, 8, 7
Hearts - 6, 5, 4, 3
Clubs - 7, 6, 5, 3, 2
East- Meyer
Spades - 6, 5, 4, 3, 2
Hearts - 10, 9, 8, 7, 2
Diamonds - Jack, 10, 9
Bond (N) 7C! XX
Meyer( E) (P)
M (S) P
Drax (W) (X)
While 007 only has 8 points in his hand, by finessing Drax's Club tenances and promoting Bond's long Diamond suit, he establishes a whopping 13 tricks!
I must admit that I assumed this puzzle featured a game of Solo Whist, with South bidding 'Misere Ouverte' and West 'Solo' (though West might claim 'abundance') Not playing either game, I relied heavily on research to work this one through.
C
Hello C - nice to see that hand again, many thanks!
I too was a little thrown by 'abundance' which I took to be a reference to solo. I think we have to allow for a little poetic latitude here, because only with the benefit of several days' hindsight do I realise that 'abundance' is probably also a veiled reference to the word we ended up highlighting! Am I slow in spotting that?
I had played (a little) solo and bridge way back, and fortunately spotted the makings of Yarborough, which rang a faint bell, at an early stage. A good puzzle by my reckoning ... as also is this week's offering - very tidily constructed, I enjoyed it.
I too was a little thrown by 'abundance' which I took to be a reference to solo. I think we have to allow for a little poetic latitude here, because only with the benefit of several days' hindsight do I realise that 'abundance' is probably also a veiled reference to the word we ended up highlighting! Am I slow in spotting that?
I had played (a little) solo and bridge way back, and fortunately spotted the makings of Yarborough, which rang a faint bell, at an early stage. A good puzzle by my reckoning ... as also is this week's offering - very tidily constructed, I enjoyed it.
Yes, I agree about this week's puzzle too. Last week's, on the other hand, I ended up feeling a bit cheated by - you expect to have more to show for all the effort of completing a Listener.
Regarding the longest word in East's hand, it was its synonymity with abundance that made me confident I had the correct distribution of cards, although I'm looking forward to confirmation of that tonight !
C
Regarding the longest word in East's hand, it was its synonymity with abundance that made me confident I had the correct distribution of cards, although I'm looking forward to confirmation of that tonight !
C
Phew ! Wrong game, correct solution !
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/art s_and_entertainment/games_and_puzzles/article2 842145.ece
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/art s_and_entertainment/games_and_puzzles/article2 842145.ece
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.